DOCSLIB.ORG

Adam Bouland

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Adam Bouland Adam Bouland Department of Computer Science, Stanford University 172 Gates Computer Science, Stanford, CA 94305 [email protected], http://theory.stanford.edu/~abouland/ Academic Assistant Professor of Computer Science, Stanford Univeristy (July. 2021-present) Appointments Postdoctoral Researcher, UC Berkeley/Simons Institute for the Theory of Computing, ad- vised by Umesh Vazirani (Sept. 2017-June 2021). Education Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA Ph.D. in Computer Science, September 2017, advised by Scott Aaronson University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK M.Phil. in Advanced Computer Science, 2011, advised by Anuj Dawar M.A.St. in Mathematics, 2010 Yale University, New Haven, CT B.S. Computer Science & Mathematics, Physics, 2009 Summa Cum Laude, Distinction in Both Majors Awards NSF Graduate Research Fellowship, 2011-2016 Marshall Scholar, UK Government, 2009-2011 Howard L. Schultz Prize, Yale Physics Department, 2009 Junior Inductee into Phi Beta Kappa (top 10 in class of >1000), Yale Chapter, 2007 Additional Technical Advisor, QC Ware, Palo Alto, CA, June 2018-present Positions Near-term quantum algorithm development for quantum software startup. Research Visitor: F. U. Berlin, June 2018 (Host: Jens Eisert), U. Bristol, Aug. 2016 (Host: Ashley Montanaro), Tokyo Institute of Technology, Dec. 2016 (Host: Tomoyuki Morimae), Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science (QuICS), University of Mary- land, Aug. 2015 (Host: Stephen Jordan), Centre for Quantum Technologies (CQT), Singapore, Jan.-Apr. 2014, Jun.-Aug. 2015 (Host: Miklos Santha). Undergraduate Research, Yale, Stanford, 2008-2009 Designed algorithms to improve multi-way sparse cuts in graphs. Advised by Daniel Spielman. Created software to analyze cosmic microwave background anisotropies and galaxy cluster surveys. Advised by Richard Easther (Yale) and Risa Wechsler (Stanford). Teaching Mentor, MIT SPUR and UROP programs for undergraduate research, Summers 2012, 2013, 2014 and subsequent semesters. Mentored undergraduate students on research projects in theoretical computer science and physics. Projects resulted in three publications. Students and projects included: • Xue Zhang: Quantum Computing with Commuting Gate Sets (Summer 2014-Spring 2015) • Mitchell Lee: Quantum Computing with Hidden Variables (Summer-Fall 2013) • Hyun Sub Hwang: Quantum vs. Classical Oracles (Summer 2013) • Lynn Chua: Psi-Epistemic Theories (Summer-Fall 2012) • Mark Velednitsky: Graph Isomorphism and Crossing Number (Summer 2012) Teaching Assistant, Quantum Complexity Theory, MIT Subject 6.845, Fall 2014 Grader, Quantum Complexity Theory, MIT Subject 6.845, Fall 2012 Publications Please note: Author ordering is by default alphabetical in my field [18] A. Bouland, B. Fefferman, Z. Landau and Y. Liu. “Noise and the frontier of quantum su- premacy.” In submission. arXiv:2102.01738 (2021). [17] A. Bouland, B. Fefferman, and U. Vazirani. “Computational pseudorandomness, the wormhole growth paradox, and constraints on the AdS/CFT duality.” In 2020 ACM Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science (ITCS’20). arXiv:1910.14646 (2019). [16] J. Haferkamp, D. Hangleiter, A. Bouland, B. Fefferman, J. Eisert, and J. Bermejo-Vega. “Closing gaps of a quantum advantage with short-time Hamiltonian dynamics.” Physical Re- view Letters 125, 250501, arXiv:1908.08069 (2021). [15] A. Bouland, B. Fefferman, C. Nirkhe, and U. Vazirani. “On the Complexity and Veri- fication of Quantum Random Circuit Sampling.”Nature Physics 15, pp. 159–163. Abstract in Proc. 2019 ACM Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science (ITCS’19). arXiv:1803.04402 (2019). [14] S. Ben-David, A. Bouland, A. Garg and R. Kothari . “Classical Lower Bounds from Quantum Upper Bounds.” In Proc. 59th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’18). arXiv:1807.06256 (2018). [13] A. Bouland and M. Ozols. “Trading Inverses for an Irrep in the Solovay-Kitaev Theorem.” In Proc. Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptogra- phy (TQC’18). arXiv:1712.09798 (2018). [12] A. Bouland, D. Koh and J. Fitzsimons. “Complexity Classification of Conjugated Clif- ford Circuits.” In Proc. 33rd Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC’18). arX- iv:1709.01805 (2018). [11] S. Aaronson, A. Bouland, G. Kuperberg and S. Mehraban. “The Computational Com- plexity of Ball Permutations.” In Proc. 49th ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computation (STOC’17). arXiv:1610.06646 (2017). [10] A. Bouland, L. Chen, D. Holden, J. Thaler, and P. N. Vasudevan. “On the Power of Sta- tistical Zero Knowledge.” In Proc. 58th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’17). To appear in SIAM Journal on Computing (SICOMP) special issue for FOCS’17. arXiv:1609.02888 (2017). [9] N. Bao, A. Bouland, A. Chatwin-Davies, J. Pollack and H. Yuen. “Rescuing Complemen- tarity with Little Drama.” Journal of High Energy Physics 2016:26. arXiv:1607.05141 (2016). [8] I. Arad , A. Bouland, D. Grier, M. Santha, A. Sundaram, and S. Zhang. “On the Complexity of Probabilistic Trials for Hidden Satisfiability Problems.” InProc. 41st International Sym- posium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS ‘16). arXiv:1606.03585 (2016). [7] A. Bouland, L. Mančinska and X. Zhang. “Complexity Classification of Two-Qubit Com- muting Hamiltonians.” In Proc. 31st Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC’16). arXiv:1602.04145 (2016). [6] N. Bao, A. Bouland and S. Jordan. “Grover Search and the No-Signaling Principle.” Physi- cal Review Letters 117, 120501. arXiv:1511.00657 (2016). [5] S. Aaronson, A. Bouland, J. Fitzsimons and M. Lee. “The Space `Just Above’ BQP.” In Proc. 2016 ACM Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science (ITCS’16). arXiv: 1412.6507 (2016). [4] A. Bouland and S. Aaronson. “Generation of Universal Linear Optics by Any Beamsplit- ter.” Physical Review A 89, 062316. Editor’s Suggestion. arXiv:1310.6718 (2014). [3] S. Aaronson, A. Bouland, L. Chua and G. Lowther. “Psi-Epistemic Theories: The Role of Symmetry.” Physical Review A 88, 032111. Editor’s Suggestion. arXiv:1303.2834 (2013). [2] A. Bouland, A. Dawar and E. Kopczyński. “On Tractable Parameterizations of Graph Isomorphism.” In Proc. 7th International Symposium on Parameterized and Exact Computa- tion (IPEC) (2012). [1] A. Bouland, R. Easther and K. Rosenfeld. “Caching and Interpolated Likelihoods: Accel- erating Cosmological Monte Carlo Markov Chains”. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics 2011(05). arXiv:1012.5299 (2011). Expository “Establishing Quantum Advantage.” XRDS: Crossroads, The ACM Magazine for Students. Writings Volume 23 Issue 1, Fall 2016, Pages 40-44 (2016). Oral “Noise and the frontier of quantum supremacy,” Presented as a contributed talk at Quantum Presentations Information Processing 2021 (virtual). “Pseudorandomness and the AdS/CFT Correspondence”, invited talk at Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics, March 2021, It from Qubit Workshop, December 2020, Workshop on Complexity from Quantum Information to Black Holes, Lorenz Center, Netherlands, June 2020. Oral “Theoretical Computer Science at the Quantum Crossroads”/“Quantum physics at the Com- Presentations plexity Crossroads.” Special seminars at UC San Diego CSE/Math Colloquium, UC Berkeley Physics Colloqiuum, Stanford Computer Science Colloquium, Harvard Quantum Initiative Cont’d Colloquium, UC Davis Computer Science Colloquium, UC Irvine Computer Science Colloqui- um, CU Boulder CS Colloquium, UC Santa Barbara Computer Science Colloquium, Spr. 2020. “Quantum Supremacy Bootcamp I&II,” “Power and Limitations of the QAOA,” and “Compu- tational Pseudorandomness and Constraints on the AdS/CFT Duality.” Invited lectures at the Simons Institute Quantum Wave in Computing program, Berkeley, CA, Spring 2020. “Quantum Supremacy and its applications,” Invited lectures at IIAS Winter School on The Mathematics of Quantum Computation, Jerusalem, Israel, December 2019. “Quantum Supremacy and the Complexity of Random Circuit Sampling.“ A. Bouland, B. Fef- ferman, C. Nirkhe, and U. Vazirani. Presented as a contributed talk at Quantum Information Processing (QIP) 2019, Boulder, Colorado, January 2019. Also presented at: Google quantum information seminar, Los Angeles, CA, April 2018. Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics (SITP) seminar, Stanford, CA, May 2018. MIT Quantum Information seminar, Cambridge, MA, May 2018. FU Berlin Quantum Information seminar, Berlin, Germany, June 2018. Si- mons Institute lightning talk, July 2018. “What you need to know about quantum algorithms” and “The Quantum Algorithms Land- scape,” Q2B conference, Mountain View, CA, December 2018, December 2019, December 2020. “Introduction to Quantum Complexity”, Invited talk at Quantum Information for Developers Summer School, ETH Zurich, Switzerland, September 2018. “Classical Lower Bounds from Quantum Upper Bounds.” S. Ben-David, A. Bouland, A. Garg and R. Kothari. Presented as a contributed talk at Quantum Information Processing (QIP) 2018, Delft, Netherlands, January 2018. Presented as an invited talk at Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptography (TQC) 2018, Sydney, Australia, July 2018. “Quantum Advantage from Sampling Problems.” Stanford/Google X workshop on Quantum Information, Mountain View, CA, November 2017. “The Space Below BQP.” Quantum Innovators in Math and Computer Science Workshop, Institute for Quantum Computing, Waterloo, Canada, September 2017. “The Space Around BQP.” MIT Thesis Defense, June 30, 2017
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Multiplicative Weights Update Method: a Meta-Algorithm and Applications
    THEORY OF COMPUTING, Volume 8 (2012), pp. 121–164 www.theoryofcomputing.org RESEARCH SURVEY The Multiplicative Weights Update Method: A Meta-Algorithm and Applications Sanjeev Arora∗ Elad Hazan Satyen Kale Received: July 22, 2008; revised: July 2, 2011; published: May 1, 2012. Abstract: Algorithms in varied fields use the idea of maintaining a distribution over a certain set and use the multiplicative update rule to iteratively change these weights. Their analyses are usually very similar and rely on an exponential potential function. In this survey we present a simple meta-algorithm that unifies many of these disparate algorithms and derives them as simple instantiations of the meta-algorithm. We feel that since this meta-algorithm and its analysis are so simple, and its applications so broad, it should be a standard part of algorithms courses, like “divide and conquer.” ACM Classification: G.1.6 AMS Classification: 68Q25 Key words and phrases: algorithms, game theory, machine learning 1 Introduction The Multiplicative Weights (MW) method is a simple idea which has been repeatedly discovered in fields as diverse as Machine Learning, Optimization, and Game Theory. The setting for this algorithm is the following. A decision maker has a choice of n decisions, and needs to repeatedly make a decision and obtain an associated payoff. The decision maker’s goal, in the long run, is to achieve a total payoff which is comparable to the payoff of that fixed decision that maximizes the total payoff with the benefit of ∗This project was supported by David and Lucile Packard Fellowship and NSF grants MSPA-MCS 0528414 and CCR- 0205594.
    [Show full text]
  • Limits on Efficient Computation in the Physical World
    Limits on Efficient Computation in the Physical World by Scott Joel Aaronson Bachelor of Science (Cornell University) 2000 A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science in the GRADUATE DIVISION of the UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY Committee in charge: Professor Umesh Vazirani, Chair Professor Luca Trevisan Professor K. Birgitta Whaley Fall 2004 The dissertation of Scott Joel Aaronson is approved: Chair Date Date Date University of California, Berkeley Fall 2004 Limits on Efficient Computation in the Physical World Copyright 2004 by Scott Joel Aaronson 1 Abstract Limits on Efficient Computation in the Physical World by Scott Joel Aaronson Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science University of California, Berkeley Professor Umesh Vazirani, Chair More than a speculative technology, quantum computing seems to challenge our most basic intuitions about how the physical world should behave. In this thesis I show that, while some intuitions from classical computer science must be jettisoned in the light of modern physics, many others emerge nearly unscathed; and I use powerful tools from computational complexity theory to help determine which are which. In the first part of the thesis, I attack the common belief that quantum computing resembles classical exponential parallelism, by showing that quantum computers would face serious limitations on a wider range of problems than was previously known. In partic- ular, any quantum algorithm that solves the collision problem—that of deciding whether a sequence of n integers is one-to-one or two-to-one—must query the sequence Ω n1/5 times.
    [Show full text]
  • Closed Timelike Curves Make Quantum and Classical Computing Equivalent
    Closed Timelike Curves Make Quantum and Classical Computing Equivalent Scott Aaronson∗ John Watrous† MIT University of Waterloo Abstract While closed timelike curves (CTCs) are not known to exist, studying their consequences has led to nontrivial insights in general relativity, quantum information, and other areas. In this paper we show that if CTCs existed, then quantum computers would be no more powerful than classical computers: both would have the (extremely large) power of the complexity class PSPACE, consisting of all problems solvable by a conventional computer using a polynomial amount of memory. This solves an open problem proposed by one of us in 2005, and gives an essentially complete understanding of computational complexity in the presence of CTCs. Following the work of Deutsch, we treat a CTC as simply a region of spacetime where a “causal consistency” condition is imposed, meaning that Nature has to produce a (probabilistic or quantum) fixed-point of some evolution operator. Our conclusion is then a consequence of the following theorem: given any quantum circuit (not necessarily unitary), a fixed-point of the circuit can be (implicitly) computed in polynomial space. This theorem might have independent applications in quantum information. 1 Introduction The possibility of closed timelike curves (CTCs) within general relativity and quantum gravity theories has been studied for almost a century [11, 15, 13]. A different line of research has sought to understand the implications of CTCs, supposing they existed, for quantum mechanics, computation, and information [9, 8, 5]. In this paper we contribute to the latter topic, by giving the first complete characterization of the computational power of CTCs.
    [Show full text]
  • Expander Flows, Geometric Embeddings and Graph Partitioning
    Expander Flows, Geometric Embeddings and Graph Partitioning SANJEEV ARORA Princeton University SATISH RAO and UMESH VAZIRANI UC Berkeley We give a O(√log n)-approximation algorithm for the sparsest cut, edge expansion, balanced separator,andgraph conductance problems. This improves the O(log n)-approximation of Leighton and Rao (1988). We use a well-known semidefinite relaxation with triangle inequality constraints. Central to our analysis is a geometric theorem about projections of point sets in d, whose proof makes essential use of a phenomenon called measure concentration. We also describe an interesting and natural “approximate certificate” for a graph’s expansion, which involves embedding an n-node expander in it with appropriate dilation and congestion. We call this an expander flow. Categories and Subject Descriptors: F.2.2 [Theory of Computation]: Analysis of Algorithms and Problem Complexity; G.2.2 [Mathematics of Computing]: Discrete Mathematics and Graph Algorithms General Terms: Algorithms,Theory Additional Key Words and Phrases: Graph Partitioning,semidefinite programs,graph separa- tors,multicommodity flows,expansion,expanders 1. INTRODUCTION Partitioning a graph into two (or more) large pieces while minimizing the size of the “interface” between them is a fundamental combinatorial problem. Graph partitions or separators are central objects of study in the theory of Markov chains, geometric embeddings and are a natural algorithmic primitive in numerous settings, including clustering, divide and conquer approaches, PRAM emulation, VLSI layout, and packet routing in distributed networks. Since finding optimal separators is NP-hard, one is forced to settle for approximation algorithms (see Shmoys [1995]). Here we give new approximation algorithms for some of the important problems in this class.
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Pseudorandomness, the Wormhole Growth Paradox, and Constraints on the Ads/CFT Duality
    Computational Pseudorandomness, the Wormhole Growth Paradox, and Constraints on the AdS/CFT Duality Adam Bouland Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of California, Berkeley, 617 Soda Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, U.S.A. [email protected] Bill Fefferman Department of Computer Science, University of Chicago, 5730 S Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637, U.S.A. [email protected] Umesh Vazirani Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of California, Berkeley, 671 Soda Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720, U.S.A. [email protected] Abstract The AdS/CFT correspondence is central to efforts to reconcile gravity and quantum mechanics, a fundamental goal of physics. It posits a duality between a gravitational theory in Anti de Sitter (AdS) space and a quantum mechanical conformal field theory (CFT), embodied in a map known as the AdS/CFT dictionary mapping states to states and operators to operators. This dictionary map is not well understood and has only been computed on special, structured instances. In this work we introduce cryptographic ideas to the study of AdS/CFT, and provide evidence that either the dictionary must be exponentially hard to compute, or else the quantum Extended Church-Turing thesis must be false in quantum gravity. Our argument has its origins in a fundamental paradox in the AdS/CFT correspondence known as the wormhole growth paradox. The paradox is that the CFT is believed to be “scrambling” – i.e. the expectation value of local operators equilibrates in polynomial time – whereas the gravity theory is not, because the interiors of certain black holes known as “wormholes” do not equilibrate and instead their volume grows at a linear rate for at least an exponential amount of time.
    [Show full text]
  • NP-Complete Problems and Physical Reality
    NP-complete Problems and Physical Reality Scott Aaronson∗ Abstract Can NP-complete problems be solved efficiently in the physical universe? I survey proposals including soap bubbles, protein folding, quantum computing, quantum advice, quantum adia- batic algorithms, quantum-mechanical nonlinearities, hidden variables, relativistic time dilation, analog computing, Malament-Hogarth spacetimes, quantum gravity, closed timelike curves, and “anthropic computing.” The section on soap bubbles even includes some “experimental” re- sults. While I do not believe that any of the proposals will let us solve NP-complete problems efficiently, I argue that by studying them, we can learn something not only about computation but also about physics. 1 Introduction “Let a computer smear—with the right kind of quantum randomness—and you create, in effect, a ‘parallel’ machine with an astronomical number of processors . All you have to do is be sure that when you collapse the system, you choose the version that happened to find the needle in the mathematical haystack.” —From Quarantine [31], a 1992 science-fiction novel by Greg Egan If I had to debate the science writer John Horgan’s claim that basic science is coming to an end [48], my argument would lean heavily on one fact: it has been only a decade since we learned that quantum computers could factor integers in polynomial time. In my (unbiased) opinion, the showdown that quantum computing has forced—between our deepest intuitions about computers on the one hand, and our best-confirmed theory of the physical world on the other—constitutes one of the most exciting scientific dramas of our time.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Computing : a Gentle Introduction / Eleanor Rieffel and Wolfgang Polak
    QUANTUM COMPUTING A Gentle Introduction Eleanor Rieffel and Wolfgang Polak The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England ©2011 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher. For information about special quantity discounts, please email [email protected] This book was set in Syntax and Times Roman by Westchester Book Group. Printed and bound in the United States of America. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Rieffel, Eleanor, 1965– Quantum computing : a gentle introduction / Eleanor Rieffel and Wolfgang Polak. p. cm.—(Scientific and engineering computation) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-262-01506-6 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Quantum computers. 2. Quantum theory. I. Polak, Wolfgang, 1950– II. Title. QA76.889.R54 2011 004.1—dc22 2010022682 10987654321 Contents Preface xi 1 Introduction 1 I QUANTUM BUILDING BLOCKS 7 2 Single-Qubit Quantum Systems 9 2.1 The Quantum Mechanics of Photon Polarization 9 2.1.1 A Simple Experiment 10 2.1.2 A Quantum Explanation 11 2.2 Single Quantum Bits 13 2.3 Single-Qubit Measurement 16 2.4 A Quantum Key Distribution Protocol 18 2.5 The State Space of a Single-Qubit System 21 2.5.1 Relative Phases versus Global Phases 21 2.5.2 Geometric Views of the State Space of a Single Qubit 23 2.5.3 Comments on General Quantum State Spaces
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Lower Bound for Recursive Fourier Sampling
    Quantum Lower Bound for Recursive Fourier Sampling Scott Aaronson Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton [email protected] Abstract One of the earliest quantum algorithms was discovered by Bernstein and Vazirani, for a problem called Recursive Fourier Sampling. This paper shows that the Bernstein-Vazirani algorithm is not far from optimal. The moral is that the need to “uncompute” garbage can impose a fundamental limit on efficient quantum computation. The proof introduces a new parameter of Boolean functions called the “nonparity coefficient,” which might be of independent interest. Like a classical algorithm, a quantum algorithm can solve problems recursively by calling itself as a sub- routine. When this is done, though, the algorithm typically needs to call itself twice for each subproblem to be solved. The second call’s purpose is to uncompute ‘garbage’ left over by the first call, and thereby enable interference between different branches of the computation. Of course, a factor of 2 increase in running time hardly seems like a big deal, when set against the speedups promised by quantum computing. The problem is that these factors of 2 multiply, with each level of recursion producing an additional factor. Thus, one might wonder whether the uncomputing step is really necessary, or whether a cleverly designed algorithm might avoid it. This paper gives the first nontrivial example in which recursive uncomputation is provably necessary. The example concerns a long-neglected problem called Recursive Fourier Sampling (henceforth RFS), which was introduced by Bernstein and Vazirani [5] in 1993 to prove the first oracle separation between BPP and BQP. Many surveys on quantum computing pass directly from the Deutsch-Jozsa algorithm [8] to the dramatic results of Simon [14] and Shor [13], without even mentioning RFS.
    [Show full text]
  • Limits on Efficient Computation in the Physical World by Scott Joel
    Limits on Efficient Computation in the Physical World by Scott Joel Aaronson Bachelor of Science (Cornell University) 2000 A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science in the GRADUATE DIVISION of the UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY Committee in charge: Professor Umesh Vazirani, Chair Professor Luca Trevisan Professor K. Birgitta Whaley Fall 2004 The dissertation of Scott Joel Aaronson is approved: Chair Date Date Date University of California, Berkeley Fall 2004 Limits on Efficient Computation in the Physical World Copyright 2004 by Scott Joel Aaronson 1 Abstract Limits on Efficient Computation in the Physical World by Scott Joel Aaronson Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science University of California, Berkeley Professor Umesh Vazirani, Chair More than a speculative technology, quantum computing seems to challenge our most basic intuitions about how the physical world should behave. In this thesis I show that, while some intuitions from classical computer science must be jettisoned in the light of modern physics, many others emerge nearly unscathed; and I use powerful tools from computational complexity theory to help determine which are which. In the first part of the thesis, I attack the common belief that quantum computing resembles classical exponential parallelism, by showing that quantum computers would face serious limitations on a wider range of problems than was previously known. In partic- ular, any quantum algorithm that solves the collision problem—that of deciding whether a sequence of n integers is one-to-one or two-to-one—must query the sequence Ω n1/5 times.
    [Show full text]
  • Flows, Cuts and Integral Routing in Graphs - an Approximation Algorithmist’S Perspec- Tive
    Flows, Cuts and Integral Routing in Graphs - an Approximation Algorithmist's Perspec- tive Julia Chuzhoy ∗ Abstract. Flow, cut and integral graph routing problems are among the most extensively studied in Operations Research, Optimization, Graph Theory and Computer Science. We survey known algorithmic results for these problems, including classical results and more recent developments, and discuss the major remaining open problems, with an emphasis on approximation algorithms. Mathematics Subject Classification (2010). Primary 68Q25; Secondary 68Q17, 68R05, 68R10. Keywords. Maximum flow, minimum cut, network routing, approximation algorithms, hardness of approximation, graph theory. 1. Introduction In this survey we consider flow, cut, and integral routing problems in graphs. These three types of problems are among the most extensively studied in Operations Research, Optimization, Graph Theory, and Computer Science. Problems of these types naturally arise in many applications, and algorithms for solving them are among the most valuable and powerful tools in algorithm design and analysis. In the classical maximum s{t flow problem, we are given an n-vertex graph G = (V; E), that can be either directed or undirected, with non-negative capacities c(e) on edges e 2 E, and two special vertices: s, called the source, and t, called the destination. Let P be the set of all paths connecting s to t in G. An s{t flow f is an assignment of non-negative values f(P ) to all paths P 2 P, such that for each edge e 2 E, the flow through e does not exceed its capacity c(e), that P P is, P :e2P f(P ) ≤ c(e).
    [Show full text]
  • The Power of Unentanglement
    The Power of Unentanglement Scott Aaronson∗ Salman Beigi Andrew Drucker Bill Fefferman MIT MIT MIT University of Chicago Peter Shor MIT Abstract The class QMA (k), introduced by Kobayashi et al., consists of all languages that can be verified using k unentangled quantum proofs. Many of the simplest questions about this class have remained embarrassingly open: for example, can we give any evidence that k quantum proofs are more powerful than one? Does QMA (k) = QMA (2) for k 2? Can QMA (k) protocols be amplified to exponentially small error? ≥ In this paper, we make progress on all of the above questions. We give a protocol by which a verifier can be convinced that a 3Sat formula of size m is • satisfiable, with constant soundness, given O (√m) unentangled quantum witnesses with O (log m) qubits each. Our protocol relies on the existence of very short PCPs. We show that assuming a weak version of thee Additivity Conjecture from quantum infor- • mation theory, any QMA (2) protocol can be amplified to exponentially small error, and QMA (k)= QMA (2) for all k 2. ≥ We prove the nonexistence of “perfect disentanglers” for simulating multiple Merlins with • one. 1 Introduction Quantum entanglement is often described as a complicated, hard-to-understand resource. But ironically, many questions in quantum computing are easiest to answer assuming unlimited entan- glement, and become much more difficult if entanglement is not allowed! One way to understand this is that Hilbert space—the space of all quantum states—has extremely useful linear-algebraic properties, and when we restrict to the set of separable states we lose many of those properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical Verification and Blind Delegation of Quantum
    Classical Verification and Blind Delegation of Quantum Computations by Urmila M. Mahadev A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Umesh Vazirani, Chair Professor Satish Rao Professor Nikhil Srivastava Spring 2018 Classical Verification and Blind Delegation of Quantum Computations Copyright 2018 by Urmila M. Mahadev 1 Abstract Classical Verification and Blind Delegation of Quantum Computations by Urmila M. Mahadev Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science University of California, Berkeley Professor Umesh Vazirani, Chair In this dissertation, we solve two open questions. First, can the output of a quantum computation be verified classically? We give the first protocol for provable classical verifica- tion of efficient quantum computations, depending only on the assumption that the learning with errors problem is post-quantum secure. The second question, which is related to verifiability and is often referred to as blind computation, asks the following: can a classical client delegate a desired quantum compu- tation to a remote quantum server while hiding all data from the server? This is especially relevant to proposals for quantum computing in the cloud. For classical computations, this task is achieved by the celebrated result of fully homomorphic encryption ([23]). We prove an analogous result for quantum computations by showing that certain classical homomorphic encryption schemes, when used in a different manner, are able to homomorphically evaluate quantum circuits. While we use entirely different techniques to construct the verification and homomorphic encryption protocols, they both rely on the same underlying cryptographic primitive of trapdoor claw-free functions.
    [Show full text]